i-quv's answer about how to measure the force is actually the correct one. I had thought about a similar idea but discarded it because I was sure that it wouldn't work. I think I actually alluded to it in my post. Then he mentioned it, and I said to myself, "Well, I should take a moment and think of a good explanation of why it wouldn't work." But as I thought about it, I realized that it would work. I had been thinking that the reason that a spring-based scale would bob up and down when you put something on it was just sort of a property of the spring and could not be avoided. But that's not really true. The reason it bobs up and down is that when you first put something on it, it's above it's equillibrium point and it falls and then you get some extra force caused by the downwards momentum. And that's precisely what we're trying to measure. So what we would need would be to look at the heaviest weight which the scale reads. Then we'd probably want to add a little to that because the scale is probably a little more elastic than the testicles, and the elasticity will mitigate the force some on the way down.
Anyone out there have a fishing or other scale which can have things hung from it and willing to give it a try? You don't have to use your balls for the test, you can loop it around your belt or something. Just choose something, attach it to the scale, find out its initial weight, jump about a foot in the air and see what the maximum weight indicated is. Then if you divide the second number by the first, this should give us a general purpose ratio. I'd do it myself, but I don't have a scale of the right type.
Smack
 |
 |
 |
|||||||
 |
|||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
Reply With Quote
but unfortunately I don't have a spring balance either. I'll give it a go if I come across one though.
I think this'll be sorted in an hour or so. 
Originally Posted by smackMyNuts
Anybody aware of any evidence for >50lbs?
